(CNN) - Continuing his charge against the Obama administration on gun control proposals, Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association is scheduled to respond to the president's State of the Union while speaking Thursday at the annual convention for the National Wild Turkey Federation in Nashville.

The speech comes one day after LaPierre issued a rally-cry for gun owners, writing in an op-ed that "good Americans are prudently getting ready to protect themselves" against what he described as an onslaught of doom.Follow @politicaltickerFollow @KilloughCNN

"Hurricanes. Tornadoes. Riots. Terrorists. Gangs. Lone criminals. These are perils we are sure to face-not just maybe. It's not paranoia to buy a gun. It's survival," the NRA's executive vice president wrote in the op-ed published Wednesday by the conservative news website, The Daily Caller.

"It's responsible behavior," he continued. "And it's time we encourage law-abiding Americans to do just that."

LaPierre has been a leading yet controversial voice against gun control proposals as Washington grapples with a flood of firearm legislation in the wake of the Connecticut elementary school shooting. President Obama also renewed his plea for Congress to vote on tougher gun laws during his State of the Union address earlier this week.

"Each of these proposals deserves a vote in Congress. If you want to vote no, that's your choice. But these proposals deserve a vote," Obama said. "Because in the two months since Newtown, more than a thousand birthdays, graduations, and anniversaries have been stolen from our lives by a bullet from a gun."First on CNN: NRA charges Obama’s efforts will lead to gun confiscation

LaPierre wrote that defenders of gun rights are more fired up than ever to purchase firearms-not because they fear conflict with the government, as some have argued, but because they "anticipate confrontations where the government isn't there."

As examples, he cited stories of looting after Superstorm Sandy, claimed terrorists would infiltrate through the U.S. southern border and warned of a lack of funds to pay for police protection should Obama's fiscal policies result in economic disaster.

"No wonder Americans are buying guns in record numbers right now, while they still can and before their choice about which firearm is right for their family is taken away forever," he wrote.

White House Senior Adviser David Plouffe responded to the op-ed, writing on Twitter Wednesday that it's "hard to believe this is real. Every GOPer should read and decide if this delusional person will call the shots."

LaPierre further laid out a four-year plan for a "resistance movement" that entails fighting legal battles against gun law legislation, boosting NRA membership, and strengthening the organization financially. Deep into his op-ed, he called for donations-"$20, $50, $250, or $1,000 at a time-and dedicated several paragraphs to reasons why the group needed more members.

"An even stronger NRA is the only chance gun owners have to withstand the coming siege," he wrote, saying the group is launching a "full-court initiative" to recruit more "lover(s) of freedom." The group already one of the largest advocacy organizations, with four million members.

"This begins with remembering to keep your own membership active, or reactivate it if it has lapsed," he continued. "It means reminding yourself, 'I have a son and daughter who aren't members and should be'."

LaPierre also blamed the media, certain lawmakers and high-profile figures, such as New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, for making Americans "feel guilty about buying a gun."
"The enemies of freedom demonize gun buyers and portray us as social lepers," he added.

Concluding his op-ed, LaPierre vowed that NRA members "will not surrender."

"We will not appease. We will buy more guns than ever. We will use them for sport and lawful self-defense more than ever. We will grow the NRA more than ever. And we will be prouder than ever to be freedom-loving NRA patriots," he wrote. "We will Stand and Fight."

soundoff(404 Responses)

marie

La Pierre needs a reality check. No one is taking away guns... Jesus. However, regulation is a necesary need. How do you handle not having someone who is mentally unstable not having a gun without a background check? He has lost his mind?

February 14, 2013 01:37 pm at 1:37 pm |

Roger

Of course they'll stand and fight. An NRA member cares about the feeling of power he gets from holding a gun. He doesn't care one bit about a dead six year old in another family.

February 14, 2013 01:38 pm at 1:38 pm |

Phil in KC

These guys are out of step with the American public; they just don't know it. LaPierre, in particular, is starting to look like the lunatic fringe. If the NRA wants to remain relevant, it needs to moderate.
Also – how is the threat of tornadoes or hurricanes a defense of weapon ownership? I live in the midwest, where tornadoes occur frequently. I don't think I've ever heard of looting or personal attacks. Usually, it's just the opposite – neighbors helping neighbors.
As for his 2nd Amendment rights – I challenge him to read it closely. It frames gun ownership in the cloak of maintaining a well- regulated militia. A bunch of whackos wearing camo and running around in the woods blowing crap up does not constitute a 'well regulated militia', no matter what they think. Also – Obama is not talking about taking away all their guns. They'll still have guns for hunting, target shooting or personal defense.

February 14, 2013 01:39 pm at 1:39 pm |

Mikey

Is this "stand and fight" guy the same one that was give a deferment during Vietnam because of his "nervous disorder"?

February 14, 2013 01:40 pm at 1:40 pm |

Bill

NRA's Board who have the key voting rights is filled with people with ties to the gun industry (look it up for yourself). They do not represent the average American who supports the right to own a gun. They represent the financial interests of the gun industry.

February 14, 2013 01:40 pm at 1:40 pm |

Chaz

After all the strange goings on at Sandy Hook (there are too many unanswered questions there to ignore, and in particular the lack of photo and video evidence), yesterday's intentional burning of Christopher Dorner, and throw in the Administration's targeting of US citizens with drones – you better believe I'm going to keep my guns.

February 14, 2013 01:40 pm at 1:40 pm |

ALEX

The NRA is so out of touch with most gun owners. I'm a gun owner and think their should be stronger background checks for sure. The NRA preaches "No Change", Be afraid of the government". It's like the NRA is run by the kind of whack jobs we're all afraid of owning guns.

February 14, 2013 01:41 pm at 1:41 pm |

manhandler1

He doesn't mean the "gun OWNERS," he means gun MANUFACTURERS. This personification of evil is sickening to watch and represents the worst of humankind.

February 14, 2013 01:41 pm at 1:41 pm |

LastLiberalRepulican

What is it that the NRA officers don't understand about the assassination of babies?! Can't they get it that the out and out assassination of babies is so reprehensible that it trumps the rights of gun owners to always have their guns. NRA members have to find the basic decency to understand it's time for a stand against the NRA.

February 14, 2013 01:42 pm at 1:42 pm |

Mike,Albany

@bigd: Your trying to put forth the old argument that "guns do not kill people, people kill people", which is as flawed as it can be. A gun is an inanimate object incapable of doing anything on its own. However, put it in the hands of a person, and it becomes lethal, just as a sharpened pencil, a car (since you mentioned it), or a cruise missile could. The fact is that people will always kill other people with whatever objects they can access, so a line has to be drawn somewhere. Otherwise, why not allow any citizen to amass chemical and biological weapons or even nukes as a means of self-defense. What is needed is a common-sense approach that preserves gun rights while restricting access to weapons whose sole purpose is to inflict a large number of casualties in a minimum amount of time. A dirty bomb can do that, which is why they are illegal. An assault rifle can do that as well, so why should it be any more legal than a dirty bomb?

February 14, 2013 01:42 pm at 1:42 pm |

Zeke64

I worry more about these hothead NRA types than I worry about the average criminal. They love their guns more than anything else in their life – what a sad state of mind. We've got to begin to reduce the sheer volume of guns in this country, for our children and our grandchildren's sake. It may not make a difference now, but hopefully it will for future generations.

February 14, 2013 01:43 pm at 1:43 pm |

Anonymous

This NRA leader sounds crazy to me. He is also inciting all the crazies that should not have a weapon to use against our fellow citizens. No one is talking about taking law abiding owners guns from them. As someone that has been around guns my entire 60 plus years I was taught the value of a human life. We did not have assault weapons but rifles and shoutguns for hunting and maybe a revolver. I am for responsible gun ownership but everyone does not need a weapon. Weapon ownership is a big responsibility but we have way too many nuts with weapons slaughtering innocent people. I also have no problem with self defense but taking a human life is not something to be taken lightly.

February 14, 2013 01:43 pm at 1:43 pm |

Mac Crabbe

Tench Coxe, a Pennsylvania delegate to the U.S. Continental Congress, said, in a 1788 editorial, "Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom? Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American…" What part of that statement do you left-wing clampdown artists not understand? Just because all of you are infants who live in fear of everything does not give you the right to impose your views on all Americans everywhere.

Additionally, the term "well-regulated" meant something entirely different in colonial times. That term, back then, meant "well-supplied, trained, and armed". It did NOT mean totally controlled and restricted by a commie big brother government. Go look it up if you don't believe me. The deifinition of "well-regulated" with regards to a "militia" was used as far back as 1690.

Left-wing people are squalling infants who seem to believe that, through the passage of endless laws restricting everything, we can somehow change human nature. Their views and behavior are based on how they would like life to be, not how it really is. Constant sanctimonious and self-indulgent griping about "change", throwing your fist in the air, and screaming does not stop bad things from happening. The lefties are nothing but a bunch of violent bullies and thugs, who want decent people to be disarmed so they can attack and bully with impunity. Nothing but a bunch of gangsters.

February 14, 2013 01:43 pm at 1:43 pm |

Steve - Texas

This guy would not pass a background check.. and doubt most wanting guns would either... no wonder they are afraid for someone to see what crazies they really are....

February 14, 2013 01:43 pm at 1:43 pm |

JFKINAZ

LaPierre is inciting panic amongst parts of the NRA membership that is frankly disturbring. NO ONE is taking the Second Amendment away first of all. If you need Bushmaster AR-15 to hunt deer, then you may want to reconsider getting an eye test or taking up a new sport!?!?

February 14, 2013 01:44 pm at 1:44 pm |

colorado citizen

As a gun owner and a hunter, let me assure you that Wayne LaPierre does not speak for me. Because of him, I have not renewed my NRA membership this year. Rather than being a constructive force and active participant in conversation about overdue and sorely needed changes to our gun laws, the NRA is busy marginalizing itself and losing any of its remaining credibility. Now I don't care what Wayne LaPierre and the NRA have to say, and neither should you or our lawmakers. The NRA has become a bunch of crackpots.

February 14, 2013 01:44 pm at 1:44 pm |

JeffersonLives

The background checks are an incredibly dangerous proposition and should rightfully be opposed, here's why.. The current background checks flag the FBI and let them know that a certain individual is potentially buying a gun. Currently private sales are exempted from this reporting requirement, if there are universal checks..now the FBI can, by using that data...come up with a database of every potential gun owner...name, address, phone number, etc.. So in effect, this creates a national database, or at least in theory could be used to do so..and likely already does.

Eventual confiscation is the historically proven end result, we have seen how this plays out in other parts of the world. In modern times most of these initiatives have their roots within the United Nations agency for disarmament....its no theory...just facts.

This is why we must resist the background checks, regardless of how harmless the left makes them out to be. Did anyone ever really believe that the gun grabbers would be honest about it.....Nope. They will use every deceptive tactic they can to accomplish their goal of disarmament. Don't be fooled by those who pretend to be gun owners or second amendment advocates...these are just gun grabbers practicing the art of deception. And no Im not paranoid....and you all know it...so stop pretending that we dont know whats going on.

February 14, 2013 01:46 pm at 1:46 pm |

Hogan's Goat

OK, I am officially unhappy that a man that crazy has a gun. Maybe it IS time for gun control? The NRA is going to start killing people now? I hope they have gas masks if they come around me.

February 14, 2013 01:46 pm at 1:46 pm |

Sniffit

"Shannon

If he just calms down a bit, he will see that all of this will go away. All this fearmongering is doing is driving ammo and gun prices through the roof.
"

Newsflash: THAT IS ITS SOLE PURPOSE. It is a feature, not a bug.

February 14, 2013 01:46 pm at 1:46 pm |

curious

Guns are manufactured to kill and destroy. They don't make good door stops or plant holders. Chances are greater that the gun owners or their relatives and friends become the real victim of that fire arm. Get a dog if you need protection.

February 14, 2013 01:47 pm at 1:47 pm |

Frank

Pistols kill way more people a year than Assault rifles BTW.....Stomp on one amendment and the rest will follow...

February 14, 2013 01:47 pm at 1:47 pm |

tony

@hank
So if firearms are banned in this country people should just go around killing innocent people to defend your second amendment right? you are a very very ignant person i will not degrade the word ignorant to describe you sir

February 14, 2013 01:49 pm at 1:49 pm |

zeb

Can't we just make Wayne illegal?

February 14, 2013 01:49 pm at 1:49 pm |

Marie MD

This wannabe be Frenchman is completely nuts. I would start by taking HIS guns away as a matter od,public safety,
I grew up in Florida and at NO time did my family or friends EVER thought they needed a gun because of an impending hurricane!!!
What a stupid little man this guy is. He needs a gun to feel like a man which tells me that you are a nobody. As far ad his demented tirade on Meet the Press he should have drank some water during his interview when he was literally foaming at the mouth. It was disgusting to look at him with or without the dribble.

February 14, 2013 01:49 pm at 1:49 pm |

What!!?

I'll have to consider arming myself if people, like this nutjob LaPierre, can have guns.